NCAA Tournament Expansion

[4thAndWong]

Not sure if this a re-post, but the NCAA Tournament will most likely be expanded to 16 teams next year from 12, according to The Boston Globe:

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/095/sports/Expanding_field_is_on_NCAA_docket+.shtml

-eric

[Tom Hamill \'85]

Hallelujah!  I will be glad to get rid of the disadvantage of the teams having to play the play-in game while the other rests.  New Hampshire this year and NoDak a few years back might have been Cornell wins without the play-in game bias.

[jtwcornell91]

Here's a slightly more detailed story: http://uscho.com/news/2002/04/04_004370.php

[Greg Berge]

I still won't believe it till I see it, since we have been waiting so long, but it does look a little more likely now than before.

[Al DeFlorio]

Article and a nice picture of what appears to be Sam's goal at:

http://espn.go.com/sportsbusiness/s/2002/0327/1359104.html

[Josh '99]

It's a pity that the caption reads "New Hampshire has its sights set on reaching the Frozen Four", though.

[DeltaOne81]

I still won't believe it till I see it, since we have been waiting so long, but it does look a little more likely now than before.

See it below!

From the Ann Arbor New:
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/aanews/hockey/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/sports/1018451400314700.xml

I don't know how this passed under the radar ::snore:: . Does USCHO stop all[/I] article writing in the off-season or something? You'd think the near-guarantee of expansion finally coming to be would be worth 10 minutes of someone's time... oh well, whatever. :-)

So all it needs is the "rubber stamp" from one more group (I can't keep all these councils/committees/etc straight). Let's hope it's that easy.

-Fred, DeltaOne81 '03

[Greg Berge]

Closer, but not yet entirely approved.  (Was this the committee that killed it last year?)

[CowbellGuy]

It's at the same stage as it was weeks ago when USCHO first reported it. And they've been talking about it quite a bit since then. With the (outgoing) head of the NCAA holding an unprecedented news conference AT the Frozen Four, everyone assumed that was partly a symbolic nod that the expansion would happen. They spent an awful lot of time talking about it on the Pregame Shows and Town Meeting, as well. So... it seems to have passed under your radar, not their's.

[DeltaOne81]

Closer, but not yet entirely approved. (Was this the committee that killed it last year?)

It's at the same stage as it was weeks ago when USCHO first reported it.

I believe this was the committee that killed it last time, yes.

And, Age, I don't think that's true. The vote that the article talks about happened this past Tuesday (aka, 3 days ago) - " A proposal to increase the number of teams in each of those tournaments passed its biggest hurdle Tuesday when it gained approval from the NCAA Division I Management Council. ". The article was written Wednesday. I haven't seen any articles on USCHO since the Frozen Four, though I admit I could have missed it.

It's a three step process, this is the second step, only leaving the "rubber stamp" from the Board of Directors... " All it needs now is a review by the NCAA Board of Directors, which typically agrees with the Management Council's budget requests, for it to become effective."

I believe this vote is the one that was talked about at the press conference, so it's not completely shocking that it passed, but it is new news. So once again, yippee! :-P

-Fred, DeltaOne81 '03

[Greg Berge]

There has been considerable discussion of this on the USCHO message board -- more than 65 responses to the thread last time I visited.  But thanks for bringing it to everybody's attention.  Any positive news in this direction is welcome.

In an unrelated development, the Islanders made the playoffs and the Rangers made an early tee time.  What's the ratio of their payrolls?  1:3?  1:4?  ;-)

[CowbellGuy]

Get off your stinking high horse Greg. According to the Sporting News, Rangers=$57.3M, Islanders=$34.4M. The Isles are a far cry from the penny pinching cellar-dwellers of a few years ago. Incidentally, the Islanders are up more than $10M from last year. On the other hand, there's no excuse for the Rangers not making the playoffs (*cough* Low). Anyway, hopefully the Leafs will mop them up.

[Greg Berge]

> Get off your stinking high horse Greg.

It's not a high horse.  It's a goddamn relief after seven years in the toilet.  (And I would have been a lot happier had the Rangers just gotten a tie in their final game.)  A high horse is what I get on when I discuss the merits of the Ivies and the non-scholarship schools. ;-)

[Jordan 04]

FYI....

Numerous sources (including Canada's TSN, and I certainly believe them when it comes to hockey) have the Rangers payroll this year as having topped $70 million.  

Certainly higher than a low-balled $57.3 M.

[CowbellGuy]

Look, those are the numbers The Sporting News published in a list of every team this year along with their payroll from last year. Besides, even if it is $70M, it's still a far cry from the 3:1 or 4:1 Greg was claiming.