Talk of expanding the NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament field isn’t exactly new. In fact, it’s kind of been lingering in the background ever since the field bumped up from 65 to 68 teams back in 2011. But now, with college sports in a constant state of “What’s next?” the question is starting to feel a little more real and a bit more urgent. This week at the Big 12 meetings in Orlando, the topic resurfaced again. And while the vibe in the room wasn’t exactly one of overwhelming conviction, it’s clear that coaches are open to the idea at least in theory.
“There was a little bit that was brought forward,” Kansas head coach Bill Self said, keeping things fairly measured. “And the consensus among the coaches was that, even though it was very little, we would be in favour of it.” That “very little” part kind of says a lot. There’s interest, sure. But it’s more of a cautious curiosity than a full-throated rallying cry. No one’s out here demanding an 80-team bracket. But going to 72? Maybe 76? That seems like something the Big 12 coaches could get behind.
One of the biggest arguments for expansion is the simple fact that college basketball has changed. A lot. More programs have jumped to Division I in recent years, and the tournament field? It’s stayed frozen at 68. Meanwhile, realignment has added power programs to power leagues looking at you, Big 12 and mid-majors continue to play at a ridiculously high level.
Supporters say it’s just a matter of math. More quality teams exist. Why not give more of them a shot at the Dance? Then there’s the whole fairness argument. Every March, there are at least a few teams sitting on the bubble that seem tournament-worthy, but just miss the cut. A few more at-large bids could mean fewer snubs, and maybe even fewer Selection Sunday tears.
Well, the other side is kind of compelling too. Opponents say the NCAA Tournament is, quite possibly, the greatest event in sports because it’s so selective. Watering it down with more teams might chip away at the magic. “It’s not taken in a light-hearted way at all,” NCAA Senior VP of Basketball Dan Gavitt told ESPN. “Because of the success of the tournaments and how important they are to college basketball overall.”
He’s not wrong. March Madness is that rare thing in sports that almost everyone agrees is awesome. So changing it even just a little naturally makes people nervous.
Plus, expansion isn’t cheap. More teams mean more travel, more hotels, more meals, and more sites. It’s not as simple as just “letting a few more teams in.” There’s a whole infrastructure that would need to grow with it. And someone (read: TV networks) would need to foot the bill. But Gavitt also admitted that college basketball might be better positioned now than ever to handle a little change. “There’s no sport that is deeper overall and has more parity than men’s college basketball,” he said. “There’s great basketball played at every level.”
He’s not wrong there either. Between the explosion of the transfer portal, NIL money, and the fact that bluebloods can lose to 15-seeds in real time, we’re seeing competitive basketball all over the place. It’s wild, but in a good way. Well, if you’re a Big 12 coach, you’re probably leaning toward expansion, especially now that the league is deeper than ever with 16 teams. More bids? That’s good news for a stacked conference.
Think about it, when a league is this competitive, it’s easy to have a 19-win team that’s way better than its record looks on paper. Adding a few more spots in the tournament gives a team like that a chance to prove itself, rather than ending their season with a whimper in March. Plus, with coaches like Self (who knows a thing or two about deep tourney runs) voicing support, it lends weight to the conversation. “I do know there were discussions about that,” Self said, “but I don’t know what the number would go to.” The NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee is expected to meet again in July, and expansion is going to be a real topic. Like, not just off-the-record chatter. They’ll be talking logistics. Costs. TV deals. All of it. And let’s be honest if the networks see the value in more games and more storylines (and more ad revenue), then the momentum could shift quickly.
