NCAAT Expansion

[Capt. Tuttle]

I told you that the overall ratings for the tournament are down almost 10% in the last 10 years. I believe that the data bears that out, despite your protests.

I had a link, but didn't think it would be necessary to post, but you are sure argumentative, and switch your positions and the focus of the argument more times the longer the conversation goes on.

Here you go:

March Madness NCAA basketball TV viewership US 2024 | Statista

How many people watch March Madness? The 2024 edition of the men's tournament attracted an average TV viewership of nearly 10 million viewers in the U.S.

www.statista.com

This year's NCAA Championship game was 2nd lowest rated ever. That does not indicate a healthy product that is resonating with the audience, when girls' games are outdrawing you in your biggest game of the year.

And then you point to the play-in games having their highest ratings ever - wow. Who cares about the play-in games, unless you're in them. (Another of your arguments in this thread. No one cares after their teams are eliminated, but 67 teams get eliminated every year.)

So you point to one game not indicating anything, but again 10 year decline in viewership is factual. Not an opinion.

A big part of mass appeal of the Tournament is playing brackets at your job, and with your friends. Ignore that if you like, but it's also a fact.

The lady who is someone's secretary and picked teams based on their mascots, or where her kids went to school winds up winning the pool. Happens every year. That's part of the charm. Playing a bracket is like buying a lottery ticket, or playing parlay slips at your factory job or your corner bar in the old days.

Gambling on your phone may be the new trend, but brackets of more than 64 are ugly and not user friendly. The bracket graphic is an "app", so to speak, that literally anybody can use.

Watering down the product is not a good idea. You disagreed for 5 different reasons, but the stats say fewer people are watching. Fewer people care.

Player turnover has really hurt basketball fandom overall. Same thing with the portal. This will be a very interesting year, and 50+% roster turnover each year becomes commonplace.

It’s not a bracket problem, it’s a general viewership problem (football aside, it seems). Live TV Has Been Collapsing for a Decade. Why Hasn’t Football?
I watch far less sports than I did 15-20 years ago, and I rarely watch a game start to finish. I don’t believe I watched a minute of the men’s tournament. I did watch the Iowa women, though.
By switching the games over numerous streaming sources, they make it very hard to easily and consistently find the team you want to watch. They should make it easy to watch.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Are television ratings overall down?

Could there be any other reasons tv ratings could be down other than just popularity of said sport?

Has any technology come within the last 10-20 years that would affect TV ratings?

The NCAA (and Nielsen) also measure streaming when they compile ratings. After all, that's how they get paid.

 

[IthacaMatt]

That would take doing more than reading a chart.

Show me any data from anywhere that says the NCAA men's tournament is growing in popularity. From anywhere.

Meanwhile:

Draw a line, if that will help you, or I assume you can read numbers, right? These are the average viewership for every game, not any particular round, for the last 12 years.

And here are the ratings for every Final Four back to 1997, and Championship Game ratings beyond that back to 1975. Show me where the trend is towards "More Popular".

NCAA Men's Final Four Ratings Hub

A historical chart of NCAA Final Four ratings, including national championship games dating back to 1975 and national semifinals dating back to 1997.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

It's like you guys are all Republican with your absolute refusal to acknowledge freaking MATH.

 

[Orangezoo]

Show me any data from anywhere that says the NCAA men's tournament is growing in popularity. From anywhere.

Meanwhile:

Draw a line, if that will help you, or I assume you can read numbers, right? These are the average viewership for every game, not any particular round, for the last 12 years.

View attachment 242357

And here are the ratings for every Final Four back to 1997, and Championship Game ratings beyond that back to 1975. Show me where the trend is towards "More Popular".

NCAA Men's Final Four Ratings Hub

A historical chart of NCAA Final Four ratings, including national championship games dating back to 1975 and national semifinals dating back to 1997.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

It's like you guys are all Republican with your absolute refusal to acknowledge freaking MATH.

I’ve got a mathematics degree from SU Matt. You have breached the point of being reasonable a ways back. Many others have pointed out the fallacies in how you have sourced your argument.

Viewership is impacted by specific programs as every single year you analyze will show you. The problems with certain programs has pulled down that viewership given the boost it provides to the average viewership. Hence you have to open the file not just read the chart- analysis.

The issue with your logic is you are assuming that the viewership numbers ( which don’t trend with the continued increase in aggregate cbb revenues) clearly show a reduced interest in the tournament as a whole. That can’t be concluded without breaking down the data much deeper and looking at numerous other variables revenue not withstanding. Larger programs with longstanding success drive viewership up over the years and you can see the peaks and valleys if you open the data up.

The top 10 fan bases have a big impact on these figures and always have. This is why viewership data skews the data and the sample size of years doesn’t matter much in this chart.

Now open up the analysis further and your conclusion is expansion is bad- well if viewership numbers aren’t moving up with the current model- and specific programs have driven spikes in that viewership, then naturally expansion via volume makes sense to move the needle. That both can possibly get more games from large programs that might benefit because they have fallen back some as well as more overall programs and fans having a vested interest in the tourney. That’s just simple math.

Keeping things the same will drive consolidation as NIL dries up if there is little incentive. Conference tournaments are fun but they don’t move the needle or equate to being part of the tourney in the bigger picture. If you are rooting for failure then I guess your logic makes sense. That said there is no formula that correlates expansion with weakened support and interest for cbb.

Unless you want to fund my time I’m not spending hours to build a database of every game to break down each teams impacts on viewership paired with other things that could impact viewership while then crossing over all the revenue streams, on demand streaming volume that isn’t tabulated and putting together a predictive model. I’m sure someone already has done that just not published and likely has put forth analysis to help with the consideration of expansion .

Anyways I’m sure your conclusion is better than everyone else’s no matter what. Nice political bs too…

 

[Cappy3]

Are television ratings overall down?

Could there be any other reasons tv ratings could be down other than just popularity of said sport?

Has any technology come within the last 10-20 years that would affect TV ratings?

While network ratings are indeed down for every channel, tv executives have frequently stated that the one area that doesn’t apply to is live sports. Now I don’t know if the NCAAT ratings are down overall, but I really don’t think you can make any serious case that adding the four play-in games improved interest. And adding 4 or 8 more games mostly featuring teams barely above .500 won’t substantially affect the overall popularity.

 

[Cusefan0307]

While network ratings are indeed down for every channel, tv executives have frequently stated that the one area that doesn’t apply to is live sports. Now I don’t know if the NCAAT ratings are down overall, but I really don’t think you can make any serious case that adding the four play-in games improved interest. And adding 4 or 8 more games mostly featuring teams barely above .500 won’t substantially affect the overall popularity.

That doesn't jive with sports outside the NFL. The masters were down 20% this year. The NBA playoffs were down 12%. The World Series had it's worst rating ever last fall.

 

[djcon57]

While network ratings are indeed down for every channel, tv executives have frequently stated that the one area that doesn’t apply to is live sports. Now I don’t know if the NCAAT ratings are down overall, but I really don’t think you can make any serious case that adding the four play-in games improved interest. And adding 4 or 8 more games mostly featuring teams barely above .500 won’t substantially affect the overall popularity.

I never gave my opinion ITT if it would help or not.

I had questions specific to the idea that decline in TV ratings over the past 10-20 years suggests a sport's popularity is declining.

 

[Orangezoo]

While network ratings are indeed down for every channel, tv executives have frequently stated that the one area that doesn’t apply to is live sports. Now I don’t know if the NCAAT ratings are down overall, but I really don’t think you can make any serious case that adding the four play-in games improved interest. And adding 4 or 8 more games mostly featuring teams barely above .500 won’t substantially affect the overall popularity.

Oddly enough it depends who those teams are. Popularity is an ambiguous term too. When you open things up to more fanbases in total it’s a needle mover just common sense( how much it moves depends). I think it’s mitigation though too… if you sit by and do nothing you very likely accelerate consolidation. So let cbb die or take steps to try counter consolidation? The tournament is the golden goose so if there is something to keep more parties engaged it’s the best tool there is.

 

[Cappy3]

Oddly enough it depends who those teams are. Popularity is an ambiguous term too. When you open things up to more fanbases in total it’s a needle mover just common sense( how much it moves depends). I think it’s mitigation though too… if you sit by and do nothing you very likely accelerate consolidation. So let cbb die or take steps to try counter consolidation? The tournament is the golden goose so if there is something to keep more parties engaged it’s the best tool there is.

Well, adding teams that aren’t from the P5 won’t convince them not to form their own association. And adding teams that are means more ridiculous 17-15 8th place teams badly out of place in a championship (and please remember that’s what this is) event.

 

[Orangezoo]

Well, adding teams that aren’t from the P5 won’t convince them not to form their own association. And adding teams that are means more ridiculous 17-15 8th place teams badly out of place in a championship (and please remember that’s what this is) event.

We will see but sitting around and watching to me is dumber than trying to do something.

 

[Charbroil]

We will see but sitting around and watching to me is dumber than trying to do something.

I can picture the creator of New Coke making a similar argument back in the 80s.

 

[atlanticuse]

Premier League, Champions League and MSL have all gone up since COVID, too.

TED LASSO!

 

[atlanticuse]

There could be 331 teams in the NCAAT and we’d still be on the bubble.

 

[atlanticuse]

That doesn't jive with sports outside the NFL. The masters were down 20% this year. The NBA playoffs were down 12%. The World Series had it's worst rating ever last fall.

MLB has pissed off fans with their political nonsense. Manfred is a spineless weasel.
I cancelled my season tickets after the woke all star game “Georgia voting law” fiasco.
I bet all the Venezuelan players were really upset over this. Or not.

MLB can eat s—T for all I care.

 

[miamicuse]

I can see a pre bubble tournament sponsored by the bubble tea companies.

 

[Orangezoo]

I can picture the creator of New Coke making a similar argument back in the 80s.

Last I knew we didn’t have any cbb craving bacteria in the body to help out.. but who knows what happens when the Russian permafrost all thaws…

 

[BBQuse]

I’ve yet to have anybody explain to me why a team that finished 8, 9, or 10 in its own league should be competing for a national championship. Kind of college’s version of participation trophies.

because with the size of leagues, and the fact that they have unbalanced schedules, there may be only a game or two and some tie-breakers separating 6-10 -- we see that almost every year in the ACC. Just look at SU this year -- on the last weekend of games we could have ended up anywhere from 4 to 9 or so. And with the free transfers, a team that finishes mid-pack in a power league but is coming together at the end of the season can make some noise in the NCAAT and, in my opinion, deserves that shot. This does tie a little to another pet peeve -- which is the total body of work garbage that was instituted recently. We should also be going back to giving more weight to the last 10 games.

 

[Cappy3]

because with the size of leagues, and the fact that they have unbalanced schedules, there may be only a game or two and some tie-breakers separating 6-10 -- we see that almost every year in the ACC. Just look at SU this year -- on the last weekend of games we could have ended up anywhere from 4 to 9 or so. And with the free transfers, a team that finishes mid-pack in a power league but is coming together at the end of the season can make some noise in the NCAAT and, in my opinion, deserves that shot. This does tie a little to another pet peeve -- which is the total body of work garbage that was instituted recently. We should also be going back to giving more weight to the last 10 games.

Sorry, but my feeling has always been that, in any sport, a team that finished well behind the league winner over a whole season of work shouldn’t have a chance to override that in a one game (or in baseball, a short series) tournament. The regular season should be worth more. But I do agree with your point about the last 10 games counting more heavily for selection purposes.

 

[orangecuse]

MLB has pissed off fans with their political nonsense. Manfred is a spineless weasel.
I cancelled my season tickets after the woke all star game “Georgia voting law” fiasco.
I bet all the Venezuelan players were really upset over this. Or not.

MLB can eat s—T for all I care.

MLB has also pissed a lot of fans off by their blackout rules, etc. As a Cleveland fan here in Charlotte, I subscribe to all major sports out of market packages, Sunday Ticket, NBA Full Court and MLB Extra Innings. If an NFL or NBA game is blacked out, it's because it's on the other related networks that everyone gets. So one never misses any games due to airing dilemmas.

However, not the case for MLB. In Charlotte, any team that's playing the Orioles/Nationals is blacked out as all of its games (other than main network games) get aired on MASN. MASN is currently only available here in Charlotte via DirecTV, either its satellite service or streaming. Spectrum (which I currently have) is the main cable provider in the area and they don't offer it in any package. How the Charlotte area is considered to be in the "regional" Baltimore vicinity, therefore, subject to blackout, is beyond bizarre. So, I'm SOL whenever games are aired on MASN and when Cleveland plays Baltimore or the Nationals, which Cleveland just played the Orioles this M-W.

The local RSN here (Bally's South/Southeast) shows all of the Atlanta Braves games.

 

[atlanticuse]

MLB has also pissed a lot of fans off by their blackout rules, etc. As a Cleveland fan here in Charlotte, I subscribe to all major sports out of market packages, Sunday Ticket, NBA Full Court and MLB Extra Innings. If an NFL or NBA game is blacked out, it's because it's on the other related networks that everyone gets. So one never misses any games due to airing dilemmas.

The local RSN here (Bally's South/Southeast) shows all of the Atlanta Braves games.

As per my earlier post (same thread) on NCAAT, chasing Fubo vs. Comcast vs. YouTube vs. whatever to watch games is overwhelming, and expensive.
We didn't have Braves games for two years, used my other house Comcast account... now it's the opposite.

 

[RandygoCuse]

Sorry, but my feeling has always been that, in any sport, a team that finished well behind the league winner over a whole season of work shouldn’t have a chance to override that in a one game (or in baseball, a short series) tournament. The regular season should be worth more. But I do agree with your point about the last 10 games counting more heavily for selection purposes.

I’m of similar feeling - I think if you haven’t had a successful regular season, you shouldn’t be in the post season. I get that there isn’t much difference between 10-8 and 8-10, but every team starts out with the ability to control their own destiny.

 

[baggerbob]

I’m of similar feeling - I think if you haven’t had a successful regular season, you shouldn’t be in the post season. I get that there isn’t much difference between 10-8 and 8-10, but every team starts out with the ability to control their own destiny.

They are going to expand, it's the only money maker for the NCAA.
With the potential settlement of the House case, they need all the revenue they can get.
People might not like it, but money always wins out.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Sherman20]

That doesn't jive with sports outside the NFL. The masters were down 20% this year. The NBA playoffs were down 12%. The World Series had it's worst rating ever last fall.

First of all, you can’t look at one year trends. Ratings for the NBA playoffs declined this year because there were a number of blowouts and non-competitive series that dragged the numbers down. The NCAA tourney ratings have been down a little bit but it still pulls in huge numbers for CBS and their sister networks. Second, more people these days watch via streaming and on-demand, and all of those viewers aren’t necessarily captured by Nielsen metrics (though it’s gotten better). Third, live sports are still the most valuable commodity because it’s appointment TV that people usually watch live (not in delayed playback), so they’re ostensibly watching the commercials. It’s more valuable to advertisers. Finally, despite the bubble bursting on streaming television, sports leagues are still signing record media contracts sports programming is still seen as a great way to reach consumers.

 

[OrangeXtreme]