NCAA Expansion -- What a Sham

NCAA Tournament Expansion – What a Sham

The NCAA has announced its plan to expand the men’s basketball tournament to 76 teams, and if you’re looking for a novel way to screw the mid‑majors with their pants on, congratulations — you’ve found it.

In the current 68‑team format, the bottom three seeds in each region are always automatic qualifiers: the champions of the one‑bid leagues. That’s twelve conferences whose best team — teams that spent four months showing that they can play – gets tossed into the bracket as a formality. Miami of Ohio is the rare exception that proves the rule – the Redhawks’ undefeated regular season was rewarded with the last at large bid. This year, Ivy League Champion Penn was a fourteen seed, despite an amazing run through Ivy Madness. In fact, over the last five years, Ivy Champions have been seeded fourteen or lower four times.

Let’s look at the new format. Sure, half the play-in games are for bubble teams. But six of the additional games are for the twelve lowest ranked teams in the tournament. And that means that twelve mid-majors will need to play-in to the field of 64.

The NCAA has essentially created a First Four for twelve mid-major conferences, a velvet‑gloved way of saying: “Congrats on your great season. Now win an extra game just to reach the round everyone actually watches.”

Meanwhile, the expansion conveniently opens the door for a dozen more mediocre power‑conference teams. At this rate, we’re a few seasons away from the entire SEC or Big Ten making the field. Meanwhile a 27–4 MAAC champion has to survive a Tuesday night coin‑flip just to earn the right to be fed to a 3‑seed. And don’t think for a moment that the Ivy League might get a second bid with the new format – the NET eliminates the mid-majors by January.

And this is happening in the same era when the transfer portal already tilts the sport toward the giants. Rick Pitino said the quiet part out loud: Why recruit high schoolers when you can just raid the portal for ready‑made players?

Translation for mid‑majors: Go scout the high schools, find the gems, develop them, and then we’ll steal them when they’re good enough to matter. One mid‑major coach was even told he’d “done a great job getting his players ready for the next level.” He didn’t know whether to say thank you or take a swing.

Greed doesn’t bother me. Shortsightedness does.

We love the mid‑major that crashes the Sweet 16 — Princeton, St. Peter’s, Loyola, George Mason, pick your Cinderella. Those runs are the lifeblood of March. They’re the reason we watch. They’re the reason the sport still feels fair.

The NCAA just made those runs harder. Not by a little. By adding a whole extra layer of bureaucracy disguised as basketball.

At some point, the tournament risks becoming a closed ecosystem: the same four conferences, the same sixty teams, the same predictable bracket. And when that happens, when the charm and chaos drain out of March, when the little guys stop showing up in the second weekend, the question becomes unavoidable:

Will people still watch?

4 Likes

Probably. Become part of the culture. March Madness.

1 Like

It’s why there needs to be a Div 1-AA for basketball. The portal has made mid-major success infinitely harder and too expensive for non-Power division schools.

2 Likes

And therefore relegated to obscurity

As if we already are not relegated to obscurity. I would rather have a chance to compete for a title among institutions where the players actually are students, but not D-3.

Outside of the ivies, patriot leagues, maybe a few others if’s all a sham, academically. I prefer to stay D1 and join the new world. Like Penn has!

2 Likes

I agree, for now. In the long run, it will not be possible to compete unless the Ivies really want to pay.

1 Like

The real question is, “Compete for what?” Ivy titles—yes. Non‑conference wins over P4 programs—yes. NCAA tournament wins—sometimes. National championships—no. But in today’s landscape, maybe only ten programs can realistically win a title; everyone else, including the Ivies, is in the same position.

Looking at Verbal Commits, it’s common to see teams—P4 and mid‑majors alike—lose 7–10 players to the portal and replace them with as many newcomers. Simply “competing” won’t attract or retain quality players; the differentiator is the experience Ivies offer. You can’t build a real team when half the roster turns over every year—you end up with mercenaries. Some players will always chase money, but not every good player wants four schools in four years.

2 Likes

Why can the women get an invite for 3 teams, but the men can only get one? Or are the women doomed to getting only one in the future?

Here is the problem with the NCAA with the NCAA. In desperation to keep the Power 4 within the NCAA the membership has changed the voting rules for the ruling Board. The Power 4 now has 65% of the voting share. So every vote of the ruling Board serves the interests of the Power 4 and not that of the overall membership.Expanding the field means more mediocre Power 4 + Big East teams plus a couple of more teams out of A-10 and Pac 8 IMO. Overall I think the Ivies would more leadership within the NCAA in adressing the interests of both itself and the membership outside of the Power leagues.

It’s a microcosm of what our society has become. Those with the money rule. NCAA football and basketball are major pro leagues. The teams (er, “schools”) that bring in the money make the rules. The Ivies (well, at least 6 of them) could compete if they chose to do so, but they make far more money by not competing in sports. So not being competitive in D-1 football or basketball makes sense for the Ivies, although those of us who post on the Ivy boards would prefer an attempt.

1 Like

Well said.

Maybe all the mid-majors should collectively break away to a new league or jump to the NAIA and then challenge the NCAA champion to a “Super Bowl” game of champions. I bet that game would garner ratings.

I bet it wouldn’t.

Agreed. And the Power Conferences wouldn’t entertain scheduling such a game.

1 Like

“What it takes to win in college football in this day and age, in this order: great resources in the NIL area and space, outstanding players – which ties right into how much NIL you have – and then, coaching staff that’s competent,” Whittingham told Jake Butt on The Blue Print podcast. “Again, it’s in that order of importance. There’s going to be several teams in this '27 recruiting cycle that are $50 million-plus rosters. You’ve either got to keep up and embrace that or embrace irrelevance because it’s not changing, at least, right away.”

Expansion to 76 official. 12 first round games, 6 of which are between automatic bid teams. 1 new auto bid league (Pac returns) so 12 of the 32 auto bid teams have to play their way in. It will be tough for an Ivy to avoid that, although likely to avoid if a dominant Ivy regular season team wins the Tournament

Ncaa could do something cool and use the The Palestra, joining the historic Dayton arena
Im not so sure that having a competitive winnable game at a great venue is a bad thing for a team like ours this past year

1 Like

They had play-in games at the palestra in the early 80’s.

The NCAA has already stated that, since Dayton is in the Eastern time zone, the second site for the two opening round tripleheaders will be a location in either the Central, the Mountain or the Pacific time zone.