NCAA Tournament Expansion, Not Necessarily a Bad Thing

by Wil Bradley
UFR Sports Talk

Last Thursday-- April Fool's day no less, the NCAA held a press conference to discuss the potential expansion of the NCAA Men's basketball tournament to 96 teams. The idea of expanding the tournament has gone over about as well as the new NFL overtime rules.

Most opponents to expansion believe the 96 team tournament idea possesses two major weaknesses; the watering down of competition and it takes student-athletes away from the class room for too long. Yes, we know the additional revenue motivates the NCAA to make this move. This is America, and as a whole we believe in making money. Most of us would do the same, so we won't fault them for that.

The second argument, while admirable in its principle, doesn't carry much weight. Student-athletes quit being student-athletes a long time ago in the big two sports. If you believe otherwise, check the latest NCAA Graduation Rate Data. Plus, the NCAA only seems to subscribe to this theory when it comes to Div I football. All this to say, no one really buys this argument, so it holds little to no influence (Seems like a bad thing, and it is).

That leaves us to tackle the problem of diluted brackets. The NCAA in its wisdom, or need for more commas and zeros before the decimal point, may have gotten this one correct. They have seen something in the last few years in Mens' college basketball-- it's called parity.

Every season, fans complain their team got shorted by the NCAA selection committee. This season, many thought that the Big East conference produced the best teams. Many argued that some smaller schools made the tournament, at the expense of better teams from the Big East. Once the tournament began to play out, we all realized the talent gap between the Big East and other conferences had shrunk while no one was watching.

The 96 team tournament alleviates that problem. In what appears to be the most probable format, the top 32 teams would be given a bye for the first round. The remaining 64 teams would essentially enter a play-in tournament for the final 32 slots in the bracket. Equating that to the tournament as it's played now, that means the 8 through 16 seeds in every bracket would be tested. Bubble teams would in essence be given an opportunity to float their bubble into the tournament.

Smaller schools like the Butlers and St. Marys would be given the same opportunity as lower rated teams in bigger conferences. Like we've seen this season, the smaller teams can be competitive. Fans like the upsets, which makes for better TV ratings (this past weekend's semifinal games garnered good ratings for CBS).

The system also rewards teams with more experienced players. Now smaller schools can compete with more developed players, over teams bringing in one-and-done freshmen. You have to think in the recesses of the NCAA power structure, some enjoy the fact that Calipari didn't make it to the Final Four.

So before we cast away this new 96 team tournament as purely a money grab, give it a chance. Sure, we'll see some ugly games in those potential first two rounds. In the end, we'll get a few more upsets and a few more unknowns playing their way out of obscurity.

If for no other reason, fans should like the new format for one more very good reason. We get to listen to Gus Johnson call a few more tournament games!