Realignment talk not going away

[Frank Drebin 5,643]

LOL at SMU.

['stache 21,818]

19 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

LOL at SMU.

They're probably still better off with the ACC leftovers than with the American, but woof at foregoing tv revenues if it continues to apply once the biggest brands are gone.

[TKthunder2 4,992]

12 hours ago, 'stache said:

They're probably still better off with the ACC leftovers than with the American, but woof at foregoing tv revenues if it continues to apply once the biggest brands are gone.

True.

I know if won’t happen due for a myriad of reasons (including the difference in TV dollars) but if FSU/Clemson land in the SEC and UNC/UVA are locked down due to in state politics, which means the B1G/SEC are both at 18…it would make so much sense for the ACC/B12 to swap SMU/Cal/Stanford for WVU/Cincy/UCF. Logic and reality need to get their shit together.

[notre dame joe 188]

It's like getting stabbed in the back by 5/12 of a knife.

[BurntOrange&White 39,934]

22 hours ago, statsman said:

Reading the thread on the FSU board. Don’t know any of the posters or how knowledgeable they are. There is almost no discussion of where they might land should they exit the ACC. 
 
Either they trust their leaders or they just assume one of the P2 would pick them up, and don’t care which?

It’s quite obvious where they are planning to go imo

[statsman 5,471]

10 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

It’s quite obvious where they are planning to go imo

Please explain it to me. 

I have heard B1G suggested, to get a wider footprint for the B1G, and more network money. I have heard SEC suggested, to keep them out of the B1G. 
 
If you see a definite path, please explain. 

[BurntOrange&White 39,934]

58 minutes ago, statsman said:

Please explain it to me. 

I have heard B1G suggested, to get a wider footprint for the B1G, and more network money. I have heard SEC suggested, to keep them out of the B1G. 
 
If you see a definite path, please explain. 

It’s 100% sec. 

[BigHornedLurker 1,940]

https://twitter.com/InsideCarolina/status/1770640872301855163

UNC Board of Trustees chair responds to Clemson lawsuit against ACC, calls for conference transparency. "Now is the time to be very open to pursuing all options..."

ACC not looking ao good 

Edited March 21 by BigHornedLurker

[Dewey 3,286]

Was never a way the ACC was going to survive, despite these idiots renewing their GOR. 

[bullet 1,597]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/um-disinclined-clemson-fsu-waging-141736577.html

Miami AD-Miami solid with ACC!  i.e. they don't have an invitation to another party-yet.

 

:,,,A UM source said the school is evaluating the situation and could respond differently if FSU and Clemson are somehow able to bolt the conference.

At the moment, UM does not have an invitation to join the Southeastern Conference or Big 10, according to a source with knowledge of the matter. The source said UM would listen if either conference called, but its hands are tied at this point.,,,"

[Vertigo 20,290]

6 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

It’s 100% sec. 

I have heard otherwise from media types. It doesn't meet the SEC criteria of "accretive addition", so it would be a debatable pickup for the SEC other than locking B1G schools out of Florida. Florida doesn't want them there, and they have shown that when they don't get their way they will be a petulant child shitting in their high chair out of spite. If I were one of the P2, I would think twice about having them in the conference. It would be hilarious if they shot their way out of the conference, and then did not get an invite from the P2 and had to settle for the B12. That said, if they are going to all of this trouble, surely they have a wink wink acknowledgement that they would get an invite somewhere right? Right??

[statsman 5,471]

We are used to these GORs being challenged by schools that already have new landing spots. 
 
I’m starting to suspect that Clemson and FSU just want to challenge the GOR, so they can go and try to find a new spot in a P2 conference, with the exit cost worked down already. Or, if they fail in that, they could perhaps negotiate a new revenue agreement, more competitive (for them) with the P2. That would explain other schools, like UNC, joining in- they want to “fix” the ACC contract/revenue and blowing up the GOR is a great first step. 
 
Or, maybe I’m wrong and they already have something worked out with the SEC or B1G. 

Edited March 21 by statsman

['stache 21,818]

I think they're definitely in the SEC, whether they have an agreement in place or not. The "one school per state" metric of the short lived cable subscription era is over. Both those programs bring lots of viewers. They're in. Miami is iffy. UNC is iffy except for basketball, not sure if its enough to make up for meh football. Same with UVA. BIG might want both for academic prowess. The rest will either regroup or the Big XII will nab some. I'd be good with adding NC State, Ga Tech, VT, Miami, Pitt, and UL. Like someone posted above, in a sane world, they'd take UCF, Cincy, and WVU and we'd take Stanford, Cal, and SMU. But we know that won't happen. Maybe all can combine for a Coast to Coast conference without divisions so Stanford won't have to sully itself too often stepping foot in the flyover states. 

[nineliveslost 2,782]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I think they're definitely in the SEC, whether they have an agreement in place or not. The "one school per state" metric of the short lived cable subscription era is over. Both those programs bring lots of viewers. They're in. Miami is iffy. UNC is iffy except for basketball, not sure if its enough to make up for meh football. Same with UVA. BIG might want both for academic prowess. The rest will either regroup or the Big XII will nab some. I'd be good with adding NC State, Ga Tech, VT, Miami, Pitt, and UL. Like someone posted above, in a sane world, they'd take UCF, Cincy, and WVU and we'd take Stanford, Cal, and SMU. But we know that won't happen. Maybe all can combine for a Coast to Coast conference without divisions so Stanford won't have to sully itself too often stepping foot in the flyover states. 

UNC will have its choice of SEC or BIG. It is my opinion they might be in the top 3 want for either of those conferences. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,464]

5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think they're definitely in the SEC, whether they have an agreement in place or not. The "one school per state" metric of the short lived cable subscription era is over. Both those programs bring lots of viewers. They're in. Miami is iffy. UNC is iffy except for basketball, not sure if its enough to make up for meh football. Same with UVA. BIG might want both for academic prowess. The rest will either regroup or the Big XII will nab some. I'd be good with adding NC State, Ga Tech, VT, Miami, Pitt, and UL. Like someone posted above, in a sane world, they'd take UCF, Cincy, and WVU and we'd take Stanford, Cal, and SMU. But we know that won't happen. Maybe all can combine for a Coast to Coast conference without divisions so Stanford won't have to sully itself too often stepping foot in the flyover states. 

The ACC leftovers that actually care about sports will merge with us in a “best of the rest” conference that should be entertaining in football and elite in hoops

[Al_4_ISU 12,464]

59 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

I have heard otherwise from media types. It doesn't meet the SEC criteria of "accretive addition", so it would be a debatable pickup for the SEC other than locking B1G schools out of Florida. Florida doesn't want them there, and they have shown that when they don't get their way they will be a petulant child shitting in their high chair out of spite. If I were one of the P2, I would think twice about having them in the conference. It would be hilarious if they shot their way out of the conference, and then did not get an invite from the P2 and had to settle for the B12. That said, if they are going to all of this trouble, surely they have a wink wink acknowledgement that they would get an invite somewhere right? Right??

The Big 12 is a better option than what the ACC will be though.

Is it settling when it’s your only option?  Miami just isn’t a top tier brand anymore.  It’s Nebraska with a sexier media market and a fraction of the actual eyeballs/fans.

[TrashMaster G 17,559]

1 hour ago, bullet said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/um-disinclined-clemson-fsu-waging-141736577.html

Miami AD-Miami solid with ACC!  i.e. they don't have an invitation to another party-yet.

 

:,,,A UM source said the school is evaluating the situation and could respond differently if FSU and Clemson are somehow able to bolt the conference.

At the moment, UM does not have an invitation to join the Southeastern Conference or Big 10, according to a source with knowledge of the matter. The source said UM would listen if either conference called, but its hands are tied at this point.,,,"

Miami would be a weak add for either of the Big 2.

[DanTheHorn 4,925]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

We are used to these GORs being challenged by schools that already have new landing spots. 

What schools prior to Clemson and FSU had challenged their GOR in court? I know schools had negotiated smaller exit fees but I don't remember them doing it due to the belief the GOR could be challenged.

[statsman 5,471]

22 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

What schools prior to Clemson and FSU had challenged their GOR in court? I know schools had negotiated smaller exit fees but I don't remember them doing it due to the belief the GOR could be challenged.

I don’t believe they challenged it in court, like the ACC schools. With TAMU, Texas, OU and others, the exiting schools basically said, “We’re not paying that. What’ll it take to make you happy, that we are also willing to pay?” With an understanding that nobody wanted to go to court. 

[DanTheHorn 4,925]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The ACC leftovers that actually care about sports will merge with us in a “best of the rest” conference that should be entertaining in football and elite in hoops

If I were the SEC I would take Duke, Kansas, UNC plus FSU. That way with Kentucky, Duke, Kansas and UNC the SEC would have many of the the most storied football programs and most of the most storied basketball programs.

Before people start making the football argument I happen two agree with Chris Fowler that says the next step after all this realignment will be the Super 2 trimming the dead weight like Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Rutgers, etc. So in a two tier system you have the BIG football schools bring in the FB money and get tier one money and the BIG BB school bring in the basketball money and get a part of the FB money. The BB schools then serve as the schools one beats up on during football season yet they will be the ones with all the eyes during BB season.

[Deej 76,820]

25 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

I happen two agree with Chris Fowler

I'd be more confident if you three agreed with him

.

[Al_4_ISU 12,464]

If I were the SEC I would take Duke, Kansas, UNC plus FSU. That way with Kentucky, Duke, Kansas and UNC the SEC would have many of the the most storied football programs and most of the most storied basketball programs.
Before people start making the football argument I happen two agree with Chris Fowler that says the next step after all this realignment will be the Super 2 trimming the dead weight like Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Rutgers, etc. So in a two tier system you have the BIG football schools bring in the FB money and get tier one money and the BIG BB school bring in the basketball money and get a part of the FB money. The BB schools then serve as the schools one beats up on during football season yet they will be the ones with all the eyes during BB season.

Duke and Kansas aren’t getting into the Big 10 or SEC or they’d already be there.

[IDIOTsavant 8,495]

43 minutes ago, Deej said:

I'd be more confident if you a3d with him.

.

FIFY

[DanTheHorn 4,925]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

I don’t believe they challenged it in court, like the ACC schools. With TAMU, Texas, OU and others, the exiting schools basically said, “We’re not paying that. What’ll it take to make you happy, that we are also willing to pay?” With an understanding that nobody wanted to go to court. 

Didn't all these schools leave just one or two years early. Had the BIG XII been worried they would have let things sit in court until the GOR had expired. I think it was more along the lines of Texas staying around the first time and this time it was about signing a new deal before the PAC12 and zero fear about the GOR being challenged.

[TKthunder2 4,992]

4 hours ago, DanTheHorn said:

If I were the SEC I would take Duke, Kansas, UNC plus FSU. That way with Kentucky, Duke, Kansas and UNC the SEC would have many of the the most storied football programs and most of the most storied basketball programs.

I’ve had these same thoughts. All those programs could be options if they go to 24, but if they go to 20 it’s FSU, Clemson, UNC, and one of UNC’s buddies (UVA, Duke, NCSU).

UNC’s less lucky pals plus Kansas, West Virginia, and Virginia Tech would be in the next set if they go to 24.

[statsman 5,471]

This is a few months old, written when FSU first made a legal filing-

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/10102060-report-sec-has-more-opposition-than-interest-in-adding-fsu-miami-clemson.amp.html
 
 

[DanTheHorn 4,925]

21 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

 

Here you go since I could not @ you

 

['stache 21,818]

Sankey should probably stick to football and hold back on the basketball shit talk, lol!

Edited March 22 by 'stache

[mdmost 43,004]

The SEC might want to get North Carolina and Clemson in conference to beef up the shitty SEC basketball. 

[TKthunder2 4,992]

2 hours ago, 'stache said:

Sankey should probably stick to football and hold back on the basketball shit talk, lol!

Was he doing shit talk? If so that’s dumb.

[BurntOrange&White 39,934]

3 hours ago, 'stache said:

Sankey should probably stick to football and hold back on the basketball shit talk, lol!

Imagine thinking CBB isn't going to be part of the future.....that's what his comments were about...bringing CBB with where CFB is heading.

[TKthunder2 4,992]

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Imagine thinking CBB isn't going to be part of the future.....that's what his comments were about...bringing CBB with where CFB is heading.

Can someone post his comments please?

['stache 21,818]

17 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Can someone post his comments please?

"That just tells you that the bandwidth inside the top 50 is highly competitive," Sankey said. "We are giving away highly competitive opportunities for automatic qualifiers [from smaller leagues], and I think that pressure is going to rise as we have more competitive basketball leagues at the top end because of expansion."

https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/college/SEC/2024/03/22/sec-greg-sankey-ncaa-tournament-basketball-automatic-qualifier-march-madness-record/73074108007/

 

[TKthunder2 4,992]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

"That just tells you that the bandwidth inside the top 50 is highly competitive," Sankey said. "We are giving away highly competitive opportunities for automatic qualifiers [from smaller leagues], and I think that pressure is going to rise as we have more competitive basketball leagues at the top end because of expansion."

https://www.tennessean.com/story/sports/college/SEC/2024/03/22/sec-greg-sankey-ncaa-tournament-basketball-automatic-qualifier-march-madness-record/73074108007/

 

Okay thought it would be more inflammatory…but I agree with this and I figured the Big 12/ACC/Big East would too with quality bubble teams all being in the outside looking in. The SEC, notably, didn’t have a real quality team miss out this year (17 win LSU or #90 NET Ole Miss).

We have too many DI conferences which means too many AQs. DI is too big need to be split in half like the NCAA president was trying to propose.

Is anyone actually upset by this, or is it just fun to point and laugh at the SEC’s shitty basketball?

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1,291]

On 3/19/2024 at 12:51 PM, Josef Pwag said:

I just want one side (whether it is the ACC or the unsatisfied institutions) to have a lopsided, humiliating loss. Either GORs are eviscerated or FSU & Clemson get tagged with a huge exit fee. I also want Stanford to have to be in a conference with Texas Tech. While I have your attention, I'd like to date an Asian college girl from California and some inside info on the next big crypto investment. I'm not asking for the world here. It just boils down to who among (or whom amongst) you will step up and deliver on all of this. I'm not getting any younger, so someone needs to get motivated and get to work. I'm counting on you. 

All of this sounds great, but I think it's better if Stanford and Cal get rejected by the Big 12.

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1,291]

15 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Okay thought it would be more inflammatory…but I agree with this and I figured the Big 12/ACC/Big East would too with quality bubble teams all being in the outside looking in. The SEC, notably, didn’t have a real quality team miss out this year (17 win LSU or #90 NET Ole Miss).

We have too many DI conferences which means too many AQs. DI is too big need to be split in half like the NCAA president was trying to propose.

Is anyone actually upset by this, or is it just fun to point and laugh at the SEC’s shitty basketball?

I'm not upset by it, but I would rather watch the tiny schools pull off upsets and make runs than see a mediocre power school do that. So I think he's dead wrong in terms of what drives viewership.

[TKthunder2 4,992]

4 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I'm not upset by it, but I would rather watch the tiny schools pull off upsets and make runs than see a mediocre power school do that. So I think he's dead wrong in terms of what drives viewership.

Take a look at the ratings because they agree with him. Nobody watches the small school until the final two minutes. While that fun for fans and sport writers to romanticize these games have lower rating than your standard 8/9 matchup which means advertisers don’t pay for them. What is memorable and what makes money aren’t always the same thing.

I don’t think they need to fully split from all of DI, but I think you could drop 10 historically one bid leagues and the tournament would be far more interesting and profitable.

We have divisions for a reason. DII schools can upset DI schools, it doesn’t mean we should include them in the tournament. Shrinking the number of DI leagues is likely healthy for the NCAA.

[notre dame joe 188]

2 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Take a look at the ratings because they agree with him. Nobody watches the small school until the final two minutes. While that fun for fans and sport writers to romanticize these games have lower rating than your standard 8/9 matchup which means advertisers don’t pay for them. What is memorable and what makes money aren’t always the same thing.

I don’t think they need to fully split from all of DI, but I think you could drop 10 historically one bid leagues and the tournament would be far more interesting and profitable.

We have divisions for a reason. DII schools can upset DI schools, it doesn’t mean we should include them in the tournament. Shrinking the number of DI leagues is likely healthy for the NCAA.

It draws clicks to tournament and local news coverage even far from those 'power teams.'   Only hard bball fans would care that UK was upset but when it was done by the other Oakland, it was on the local news all over the country. 

[thunderlounge 7,865]

50 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

It draws clicks to tournament and local news coverage even far from those 'power teams.'   Only hard bball fans would care that UK was upset but when it was done by the other Oakland, it was on the local news all over the country. 

Still doesn’t put eyes on TV. TV costs money, subsidized by advertising. No dough, no show.

This is a numbers game, and if the numbers say something, that’s what the networks support. Which in turn is what companies are willing to spend some ad rev on. This isn’t rocket science. 
 

Now that may not make it right, and sure there are people who don’t/won’t like it. However, that doesn’t make it so. 

[TKthunder2 4,992]

1 hour ago, notre dame joe said:

It draws clicks to tournament and local news coverage even far from those 'power teams.'   Only hard bball fans would care that UK was upset but when it was done by the other Oakland, it was on the local news all over the country. 

Again, sportswriters and common fans like to romanticize underdog upsets but the cold hard fact are that no one watches those games outside the final minute or two.

Oakland like St Peters and Fairleigh Dickinson, Abilene Christian, or insert random school here…are fun to talk about after the fact but the next game they play also has horrible viewership too because those casual fans despite talking about the tournament and the bracket socially…don’t watch.

They see the final shot/miss on sportscenter or YouTube/tictok or twitter/fb but none of that brings in any money to the NCAA or P4+BigEast. The data doesn’t lie.

[The Original Greaser Bob 2,841]

6 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

All of this sounds great, but I think it's better if Stanford and Cal get rejected by the Big 12.

Oh, fuck off, fuckface.

[mdmost 43,004]

Thought this was an interesting chart. The Big 10 is so top heavy and it's amazing how much Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State got a giant contract for the rest. 

 

[billfromlaketravis 11,510]

1 hour ago, mdmost said:

Thought this was an interesting chart. The Big 10 is so top heavy and it's amazing how much Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State got a giant contract for the rest. 

 

I wonder how much FOX paid for USC’s potential. The three you mentioned are probably over-performing/maxed out night now. 

[Josef Pwag 1,738]

2 hours ago, mdmost said:

Thought this was an interesting chart. The Big 10 is so top heavy and it's amazing how much Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State got a giant contract for the rest. 

 

That TJ Altimore guy was arguably the most vocal presence on Twitter that was insisting that the Pac was fine and would still come through with a homerun of a TV deal. The data in this chart could be 100% accurate, I don't know, but the guy is recklessly dishonest. 

[notre dame joe 188]

On 3/23/2024 at 4:30 PM, thunderlounge said:

Still doesn’t put eyes on TV. TV costs money, subsidized by advertising. No dough, no show.

This is a numbers game, and if the numbers say something, that’s what the networks support. Which in turn is what companies are willing to spend some ad rev on. This isn’t rocket science. 
 

Now that may not make it right, and sure there are people who don’t/won’t like it. However, that doesn’t make it so. 

 

On 3/23/2024 at 5:52 PM, TKthunder2 said:

Again, sportswriters and common fans like to romanticize underdog upsets but the cold hard fact are that no one watches those games outside the final minute or two.

Oakland like St Peters and Fairleigh Dickinson, Abilene Christian, or insert random school here…are fun to talk about after the fact but the next game they play also has horrible viewership too because those casual fans despite talking about the tournament and the bracket socially…don’t watch.

They see the final shot/miss on sportscenter or YouTube/tictok or twitter/fb but none of that brings in any money to the NCAA or P4+BigEast. The data doesn’t lie.

It's about the health and size of the sport.  That will supply the ratings for the games.  The super league types want to remove a few pounds of flesh from the entire sport. 

[Horn of Gabriel 1,614]

On 3/23/2024 at 7:52 PM, TKthunder2 said:

Again, sportswriters and common fans like to romanticize underdog upsets but the cold hard fact are that no one watches those games outside the final minute or two.

...

They see the final shot/miss on sportscenter or YouTube/tictok or twitter/fb but none of that brings in any money to the NCAA or P4+BigEast. The data doesn’t lie.

I don't doubt this but you're citing this stat about the final minute - what is the source on that?  Asking honestly, not as a gotcha.  Yes, I did google first, and most of what I found was ratings in the aggregate, not minute-by-minute.

[bullet 1,597]

On 3/21/2024 at 5:57 PM, DanTheHorn said:

If I were the SEC I would take Duke, Kansas, UNC plus FSU. That way with Kentucky, Duke, Kansas and UNC the SEC would have many of the the most storied football programs and most of the most storied basketball programs.

Before people start making the football argument I happen two agree with Chris Fowler that says the next step after all this realignment will be the Super 2 trimming the dead weight like Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Rutgers, etc. So in a two tier system you have the BIG football schools bring in the FB money and get tier one money and the BIG BB school bring in the basketball money and get a part of the FB money. The BB schools then serve as the schools one beats up on during football season yet they will be the ones with all the eyes during BB season.

I really don't think there will be any trimming.  Now maybe at some point there is Prestige Worldwide with 16-20 schools.  But that league will need other weaker leagues around to pad the ooc win totals.

[bullet 1,597]

On 3/23/2024 at 12:09 AM, TKthunder2 said:

Okay thought it would be more inflammatory…but I agree with this and I figured the Big 12/ACC/Big East would too with quality bubble teams all being in the outside looking in. The SEC, notably, didn’t have a real quality team miss out this year (17 win LSU or #90 NET Ole Miss).

We have too many DI conferences which means too many AQs. DI is too big need to be split in half like the NCAA president was trying to propose.

Is anyone actually upset by this, or is it just fun to point and laugh at the SEC’s shitty basketball?

On another board someone calculated the Sweet 16s by conference since 1985.  Here is BePcr07's calculations, which seem reasonable, based on 2025 conference membership:

ACC-140

Big 10-123

SEC-104

Big 12-95

Big East-69

Next tier:

AAC-20

WCC-18

A10-15

MWC-13

Bottom tier:

MAC-7

MVC-6

CUSA-5

the rest:

Horizon-2

Ivy-2

ASun, MAAC, Patriot, Southern, Summit-1

12 conferences with 5 or more.  14 conferences with more than 1.  19 conferences with at least one.  12 conferences with zero in 40 years.  I've said you could drop the bottom 10 conferences and nobody would notice and probably the bottom 15.

[bullet 1,597]

On 3/23/2024 at 6:36 PM, notre dame joe said:

It draws clicks to tournament and local news coverage even far from those 'power teams.'   Only hard bball fans would care that UK was upset but when it was done by the other Oakland, it was on the local news all over the country. 

The same would happen if it was Indiana St. of the MVC or Duqesne of the A10.

['stache 21,818]

On 3/22/2024 at 11:09 PM, TKthunder2 said:

Okay thought it would be more inflammatory…but I agree with this and I figured the Big 12/ACC/Big East would too with quality bubble teams all being in the outside looking in. The SEC, notably, didn’t have a real quality team miss out this year (17 win LSU or #90 NET Ole Miss).

We have too many DI conferences which means too many AQs. DI is too big need to be split in half like the NCAA president was trying to propose.

Is anyone actually upset by this, or is it just fun to point and laugh at the SEC’s shitty basketball?

 

On 3/23/2024 at 2:41 PM, TKthunder2 said:

Take a look at the ratings because they agree with him. Nobody watches the small school until the final two minutes. While that fun for fans and sport writers to romanticize these games have lower rating than your standard 8/9 matchup which means advertisers don’t pay for them. What is memorable and what makes money aren’t always the same thing.

I don’t think they need to fully split from all of DI, but I think you could drop 10 historically one bid leagues and the tournament would be far more interesting and profitable.

We have divisions for a reason. DII schools can upset DI schools, it doesn’t mean we should include them in the tournament. Shrinking the number of DI leagues is likely healthy for the NCAA.

First, he didn't mention TV ratings, he's talking about competitiveness, and is so very wrong. A lower level conference tournament champion is more intriguing than the 8th or 9th place finisher in the Big 12/ACC/SEC. Also, the tuning in late only if it's an upset alert would be true regardless. The 1/16, 2/15, 3/14, etc. games are usually blowouts, so tuning in late only for upset alert would be true either way, doesn't make any difference if the lower seed is conference champ Stetson or 9th place Kansas State. An upset would be just as rare, but there is a ton of attention when its an Oral Roberts or St. Peters. Regardless, it was a dumb thing to say, especially when the SEC did so poorly in the first round. If you want to argue that there are too many D1 conferences, I'm open to that discussion, but I doubt there is a viable solution, especially if it requires excluding certain conferences. 

Edited March 25 by 'stache