NCAA Tournament Going No Ad

I figured it was only a matter of time before the NCAA Championships went along with what was being pushed and as you can read below they have agreed to use no-ad scoring effective with this year’s NCAAs in Tulsa.

The release below mentions that the recommendation to go no-ad was approved “with the health and well-being of student-athletes, the overall championship experience and fan engagement at the forefront” but I think we all know that the sole driving force behind the change is to reduce the match times for the benefit of potentially getting more matches on TV.

Having more matches on TV could potentially expand the fan base which leads to more advertising opportunities which ultimately equals more dollars. Why is more money important – because as budgets get tighter all teams are trying to figure out how to bring in more revenue to stay relevant within their own athletic departments.  If they are continually at the bottom of the totem pole then chances are greater that they’ll be the first program cut if it comes to teams getting cut.

Let’s look at these buzz words being thrown around as the reason for the changes:

Health & Well-Being of SA: If these were 40 year olds playing then reducing match times by 30 minutes would probably be a positive but we’re talking about 18 to 22 year olds that are in the best shapes of their lives. Most of these guys/gals probably have longer practice matches than ones in the regular season. Random stat – of the 17 singles matches that finished during the quarterfinals of the men’s team event only 3 went over 2 hours and 9 went under 1 hour and 30 minutes. If these singles matches were routinely taking 3+ hours to play then I could see the point in reducing them but not when they are under 2 hours. Lastly I’m assuming that student-athletes have been calling for shorter match times because they feel the current length is causing health concerns – right?  I trust there is evidence and feedback from SA’s themselves that these changes are in the “best interest of the student-athlete experience and well-being” – right?  If the answer to those 2 questions is yes then ok but somehow I have my doubts.

Overall Championship Experience & Fan Engagement: I’m curious to how these 2 are measured – through surveys maybe? I didn’t see anybody yawning or falling asleep during the Virginia/Baylor and Oklahoma/TCU matches – riveting action from start to finish with a lot of intensity both on the court and in some cases the stands. Do fans that pay $5 to $10 per day during the NCAAs really want shorter matches and are they really leaving shaking their heads saying they didn’t enjoy what they just saw? During the regular season when admission isn’t charged you have more people that come and go so keeping them engaged is more of an issue but the NCAAs charge for admission. When people are paying money to attend they know what they are getting themselves into – if they weren’t sure they probably wouldn’t come.

If the NCAA and whoever else would just come out and say we are making these changes to shorten match times to help land a TV/Streaming Rights contract with ESPN/FOX/XYZ then I think most people would accept it but to continually mask it behind the other reasons is laughable.

I didn’t think any of the matches at the NCAAs were too long with most averaging around 3 hours while at the National Indoors the average time was closer to 2 hours and 15 minutes.

Personally I like the traditional ad-scoring because I like watching the multi deuce games and the strategy involved and when I go to a match I’m there for the long haul whether it’s 2 hours, 3 hours, or 4+ hours.  I’m sure there is a segment of fans out there that likes the shortened format because they can’t commit more than a few hours to a match (work, kids, other things to do) and I understand that.

I went to the National Indoors last year in Chicago, which used no-ad scoring, and the NCAA Championships in Waco, which used ad scoring, and both were enjoyable to watch. The sudden death/deciding points in no-ad do make it exciting though so does the 5-deuce games. Both formats have pros and cons and if one can get more college tennis on TV/Streaming then I’ll support it.

If were sitting here 3 to 5 years down the road without more TV/Streaming coverage and without more butts in the seats then we’ll look back and see the changes were made just for the sake of changing. Let’s hope the powers to be have done the research to show these changes will elevate the game to the next level.

Regardless of the scoring format college tennis will still thrive in the communities where the coach is leading the charge to get more people to attend through promotions, social media, and putting a competitive product on the court; the ones that don’t do those 3 things will struggle.